American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 140, Issue 2 , Pages 207.e1-207.e8, August 2005

Fellow Eye Comparison Between the 1CU Accommodative Intraocular Lens and the Acrysof MA30 Monofocal Intraocular Lens

Presented in part at the European Symposium on Cataract, Accommodative Intraocular Lens, and Refractive Surgery.

Department of Ophthalmology, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK.

Accepted 28 February 2005. published online 23 May 2005.

Purpose

To examine the near visual clinical performance of an accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) when compared with a standard monofocal IOL in a fellow eye comparison.

Design

Prospective, randomized fellow eye comparison.

Methods

Thirty patients (60 eyes) with bilateral cataracts but otherwise normal eyes were recruited from a single university hospital cataract waiting list. Patients were randomized to receive either the 1CU accommodative IOL in their first eye or the Acrysof MA30 monofocal IOL. The alternative lens was then implanted in the second eye 4 to 6 weeks later. At all follow-up visits, a full assessment was made of distance, near and reading visual performance, and accommodative amplitude.

Results

Data are available for all patients at 6 months and 20 patients at 1 year. At 6 months, no difference was found in distance-corrected visual acuity between the two IOLs. Of the 1CU eyes, nine patients (30%) could read J6 or better at a reading speed of 80 words/min or better. In these nine patients, the mean difference in the amplitude of accommodation between the two eyes was 0.71 diopters.

Conclusions

No measurable variable distinguished eyes that developed functional reading vision from those that did not. The accommodative IOL appears to produce improved near vision in some eyes, but it does not work in all eyes, and in eyes where there is apparent accommodation, there is a discrepancy between subjective reading performance and the modest measured increase of accommodative amplitude.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This work forms part of a thesis by C.J.H. for the degree of doctor of medicine (MD), University of London, UK.

PII: S0002-9394(05)00284-9

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2005.02.057

American Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume 140, Issue 2 , Pages 207.e1-207.e8, August 2005